Hi Matt,
Does it means that all the other DBs(Oracle, MySQL, etc) might fetch
duplicates rows with GenerateTableFetch?
Thanks,
Mohit
On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 8:16 PM Matt Burgess wrote:
> Mohit,
>
> MSSQL seems to have the only parser (of the more popular DBs) that
> complains about an empty ORDE
This turned out to be pilot error because I had the wrong variable int the
mongo collection field
From: William Gosse
Sent: Thursday, August 8, 2019 4:15 PM
To: users@nifi.apache.org
Subject: RE: NIFI 1.9.2 PutMongo Update An Existing Filed
[CAUTION: This email originated from outside of Kodak
I'm trying to get a PutMongo processor to preform an update on an existing field
It the processor I have the following settings:
Mode: update
Upsert: false
Update Query: {"resourceId" : ${resourceId}}
Update Mode: With operators enabled
Before I go into the PutMongo I do a ReplaceText to put my u
Mohit,
MSSQL seems to have the only parser (of the more popular DBs) that
complains about an empty ORDER BY clause when doing paging (with
OFFSET / FETCH NEXT), so the default behavior is to throw an
exception. This happens when you don't supply a Max Value Column,
meaning you want to fetch all ro
Thanks Mike and Bryan.
Yes it seems my template was still referring the old version.
I will have it updated now and will reimport.
Also the version of NiFi we are using is the one that comes with CDF. I am
not sure if CDF supports 1.9.2 yet or not. I will reach out to Cloudera and
see if we can get
What is in the template for the bundle coordinates of your processor?
and does that match the coordinates of the NAR that is deployed?
Example:
org.apache.nifi
nifi-update-attribute-nar
1.10.0-SNAPSHOT
If you made a new version of your NAR, say 2.0.
Hi Team,
I'm facing the following issue while using MS SQL 2012+. in Nifi 1.6.0 -
*GenerateTableFetch[id=87d43fae-5c02-1f3f-a58f-9fafeac5a640]
GenerateTableFetch[id=87d43fae-5c02-1f3f-a58f-9fafeac5a640] failed to
process session due to Order by clause cannot be null or empty when using
row paging
Thanks Pierre.
On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 5:51 PM Pierre Villard
wrote:
> Hi Mohit,
>
> The initial admin you configured is the user you should use for the first
> connection in order to grant authorizations to additional users/groups. The
> initial admin should have been automatically added in the